Opinion

Brown v. Hernandez

Court
District Court, W.D. North Carolina
Filed
Oct 26, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 24.8%

although Rule 41(b) does not expressly provide for sua sponte dismissal, Rule 41(b) does not imply any such restriction and a court has the inherent power to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution or violation of a court order

How later courts described this case

  • although Rule 41(b) does not expressly provide for sua sponte dismissal, Rule 41(b) does not imply any such restriction and a court has the inherent power to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution or violation of a court order

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

STATESVILLE DIVISION

CIVIL CASE NO. 5:21-cv-00024-MR

MARCUS RANDALL BROWN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

CARLOS HERNANDEZ, et al., ) ORDER

)

Defendants. )

_______________________________ )

THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte.

The pro se incarcerated Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1201, et seq.,

addressing incidents that allegedly occurred at the Alexander Correctional

Institution. [Doc. 1]. On September 7, 2021, the Complaint was dismissed

on initial review because the Plaintiff had failed to state a claim against any

Defendant. [See Doc. 10]. The Plaintiff was granted 30 days within which

to amend the Complaint to correct its deficiencies and properly state a claim

upon which relief can be granted. He was cautioned that the failure to timely

amend the Complaint would result in this action’s dismissal without prejudice

and without further notice. [Id.].

The Plaintiff has failed to amend the Complaint, and the time to do so

has expired. The Plaintiff appears to have abandoned this action, and the

Court is unable to proceed. This case will therefore be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to

comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss

the action or any claim against it.”); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626,

630-33 (1962) (although Rule 41(b) does not expressly provide for sua

sponte dismissal, Rule 41(b) does not imply any such restriction and a court

has the inherent power to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution or violation

of a court order).

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED. _ Signed: October 26, 2021

Ct ey

Chief United States District Judge AS

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.